Jtsummers

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/20/kash-patel-fbi-russ...

Source with more than just a sentence about the topic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billion_Oyster_Project - Different effort, this one is about putting out living oysters, not just shells as GP was talking about.

And to be clear, in GP's link, living oysters do show up, but they weren't put there deliberately (the shells and every other development provided the larvae with places to grow and establish themselves). The NY project started with oyster larvae placed on discarded shells to deliberately create the new environment with an oyster population.

I used the HTML title for the submission, but the page shows this title:

Few Know About This Law, but Everyone Is Paying for It

The HTML title is the clearer of the two.

I'll be honest, while it's possible the article is genuine

No, there's not really much chance of that:

> “Dada, real planners use SAT and its relatives for timetabling, chip layout, and routing for the same reason.”

In Seattle and Portland the businesses within 1 block of new bike lanes declined faster after 2019.

I wonder if there was some event that generally killed businesses relying on foot traffic some time after 2019 that could help explain that outcome. Perhaps once that event is identified, we can consider what businesses did survive and compare them to the foot traffic heavy businesses and see if there's some other qualitative difference between those that made it through and those that didn't.

In many US schools, they'd take those things away (and return them at end of day, typically) 20-30 years ago. But it helps when it's policy, if it's not a policy then the teacher has no backing from the school.

No reason to be surprised, it was an unserious effort that didn't look for real fraud, waste, and abuse. They looked for things that could play well to their constituents, like when it turned out the State Department had subscription to Politico (oh the horror, informed public servants making critical decisions?!?!).

Yes, but nozzlegear claims that even technically "intertwined" (presumably they mean "inclined") people don't know the connection between LLMs and the broader ML work that encompasses it. That's a pretty big claim, and would be rather shocking if true. ML and deep learning were heavily invested in and discussed through the 2010s (and earlier, but the hardware developments at the end of the 2000s enabled the ML boom of the 2010s), is our industry really so memory constrained (I know there's a shortage now, but still) that people don't know the connection between machine learning and LLMs?

How is LLM (a particular area of machine learning) not machine learning? Have people already forgotten the basis for LLMs?

I thought Scheme was just an educational tool

That's one use. It's also used in commercial and open source systems. Guile, for instance, has been used as an extension language (like lua and others) in many projects.

You can directly call C++ as C++, not via a C ABI.

That's a unique definition of "native". It suggests that C is not a native language, which is going to be a hard thing to convince others of.

@nathan_compton, your sibling comment to what I'm writing now is [dead] (not [flagged]) but you're not shadowbanned, newer and older comments are still alive. I vouched for it but it's still [dead], you may want to reach out to the mods.

Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48939083

Also editorialized titles, even when accurate as in this case, are discouraged:

Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.

From the Guidelines, linked at the bottom of nearly every page on HN.

the first time a Lisp dialect has reached into native world since Clasp.

What's that supposed to mean? Many (probably most if we only consider the non-toy ones) lisp implementations are "native" (compiling to native machine code, not interpreted).

Ignoring all the other distinctions between lisps, the main difference between lisp-1 and lisp-2 (or lisp-n) is going to be how clean your code looks when you lean into the FP style. In a lisp-2 you'll need to do something like this:

  (defun apply-twice (f x)
    (funcall f (funcall f x)))

  (apply-twice #'1+ 2)

  (define (apply-twice f x)
    (f (f x))

  (apply-twice 1+ 2) ;; assuming 1+ is defined

Yes, but it existed before then (from 1984 on), and a large amount of code written for CL pre-standardization still runs without alteration or with minimal updates.

Common Lisp code can be very procedural if that's what you want to do. The entire loop macro is basically importing Algol-styled procedural loops into Lisp.

I am saddened that the industry hasn't spoken out and let the opponents define the debate.

Insisting on NDAs with the municipal leadership involved in approving the deals was a choice by the industry. This created the opportunity for their opponents to set the narrative. This was not a surprising outcome to anyone, and no one is going to cry for the execs without sufficient sense to foresee this result.

I do not know what GHG means

"Greenhouse gas"

Maybe not the ones created for humans, but high level languages, probably. More abstract languages ("high level" basically means more abstraction away from the underlying machine, with "low level" being closer to the machine) allow for compression relative to unabstracted languages.

The reason for permanent daylight savings (versus permanent standard) is to provide for later sunsets in the winter. By clock time, the sun would be rising later (after 8am in many places) but setting later as well giving people some late afternoon or evening sun. Which is better is ultimately subjective, you get short days in the winter regardless when you live far enough north.

The late sunrise can be more dangerous with a lot more people traveling in the dark (especially if there's mixed vehicle, bike, and pedestrian traffic, like around schools). So that's also something to consider, and a drawback to this particular choice.

A teaching assistant recommended I find monthly presentations or department events to attend

Depending on your school, ACM and IEEE student organizations often put these on as well, which can be a good opportunity for networking and getting involved in regional (and other) conferences as well.

Gift link: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/2026/07/generative-ai...

Archive link: https://archive.is/H5snH

Trump had previously notified lawmakers in May that the war launched in February had “terminated,” thereby negating a 60-day legal deadline under which military operations must halt without congressional authorization.

This is an interesting way to game the system. End each 60-day war and start a new one, it's a new war so a new 60-day window.

And when there is a profit motive, and no meaningful competition, there is also no motive to be efficient or effective. This is what you'll find in many of the large DOD contracts.

So it's a compounding effect. It's down to whether the overseers of the contracts care enough to rein in the contractors, or to do just enough to stay on this side of legal. And the contractors certainly aren't doing charity work, so they'll balloon the costs up to the point of significant pushback and then tighten it down a bit.

OCX kept getting funding because running a GPS ground segment is in the government's preview

I 100% agree (purview, by the way, not preview).

sometimes you need to update legacy systems

I also agree, 100%. The problem with OCX and many similar systems is that they didn't try to update a legacy system, they tried to replace the legacy system. This is a very important distinction. Upgrading should be an in-place thing (edit: for large, complex systems), and is often deliberately incremental (think "strangler fig pattern" or Ship of Theseus). Replacing may or may not be incremental, but as the OCX effort was conducted, it was decidedly not in-place and that's largely why it failed.

It was a large system that tried to deliver everything in a big bang, instead of aiming for either a side-by-side (with the prior system) series of incremental releases to prove itself out or upgrade-in-place (possibly with subsystems done in a side-by-side release fashion, or just replaced). That big bang was always going to fail and the DOD loves to put out these contracts. Unsurprisingly, the DOD has not done any effective large scale IT replacement projects that did not either outright fail (like OCX) or significantly grow in their cost and timelines (as OCX did before it failed) even if they eventually succeeded in delivering a replacement.

There isn't really much waste in federal spending.

There's actually a lot of waste. DOGE just didn't go after it. Check out DOD and all the 9- and 10-figure programs that get canceled without delivering anything, and whose work is often useless for follow-on work. OCX is a recent example, costing around $6 billion and took so long that the program it was supposed to replace ended up just doing the work instead. Essentially nothing of OCX will be retained. This isn't really unusual in the DOD.

It's available as a PDF. I think Elsevier puts the buyer's name (email address?) into the file as a watermark of sorts, but that is it.

They mean between the authors. It's a common added expression when discussing two or more people whose names suggest a familial relationship but there isn't one.

It's not that hard to understand.

Humans rarely get infected by bats.

Bat populations are large and not practically reachable, so vaccination is impractical. Eradication is undesired because they serve a useful niche in our ecology.

Dogs are the primary way humans get (got? with higher vaccination rates for dogs this has been skewed, like how the most common causes of death have changed as things like antibiotics were developed and various medical interventions for certain cancers and other conditions) infected. Dogs are typically socialized, so vaccination is practical. Dog populations are smaller and generally reachable. Feral dogs can still be a problem, but catch & release with vaccination and sterilization can reduce their population and risk factor over time (similar to what is done with cats).

So if you want the highest impact intervention, between dogs and bats the place to intervene is the dogs since you cannot, practically, intervene with bats (by vaccination or eradication).